• gurugeorge
    514
    Some thoughts on the topic, for reflection:-

    Videogames are designed to be ridiculously addictive, in fact they're probably among the most addictive things known to man, and yes they are a complete waste of time, in a sense, but so is everything else apart from love and gainful employment, in a sense. It just depends on whether you're enjoying the particular form of pastime you're indulging in.

    I don't think the oft-mooted distinction between "real" and "virtual" (in terms of distinguishing a waste of time from time well spent) is all that philosophically significant. It's a bit significant, but I don't think you can put all that much weight on it. Games are no more intrinsically a waste of time than reading a book or watching a movie - what's the intrinsic value of hanging out in a virtual world in your head (reading a story) versus hanging out in a virtual world that's realized for you (to some extent) on a screen, and is more interactive than a movie? Not much.

    The problem most people would see is that books and movies aren't designed to be as addictive (to make money). But what about potboilers? Popcorn movies? And on the other hand games are after all interactive and you are to some extent keeping your brain and reflexes active because of that interaction (games have been found to be good for old people) - although here, in terms of brain health, the really important thing is learning new things constantly, so the idea would be to play lots of different games, and constantly be learning new systems, building in new muscle memory, etc., etc., rather than sticking to one game.

    There's pros and cons to it all really. I think the really big, important distinction is between input and output, between consumption and creation. I think you need to have a balance of the two in life, and I think that's partly what people are getting at when they think of games (or other addictive pastimes pursued "too far" as one might say) as a waste of time, because in a sense games are much more weighted towards a metaphysically passive form of consumption (you are inhabiting a ruleset and virtual world that's designed and constrained by others). Although here again, some games offer room for creativity too (e.g. games that offer a huge variety of customizability in looks, or games where the gameplay requires thoughtful and creative build strategies).

    Ultimately, what people are getting at when they think of "waste of time" is (I believe) that it's ethically wrong (and likely to be dysfunctional) if a person weights their activity (their spending of time and energy) too much towards consuming what others have created, and not creating enough of their own stuff and putting it out into the world (and that doesn't mean one has to be an artist per se, but one can be an "artist" of sorts, on can be creative and bring something new into the world, in anything, even business - raising a family well would also be a creative act in this sense).

    Re. multiplayer: I think generally people stick with multiplayer games beyond a certain point more because they've made friends they enjoy hanging out with, that's the real longevity for most multiplayer games.
  • Janus
    16.2k
    Reading books may contribute to re-forming your character, your intelligence, knowledge and understanding, emotional and ethical responses, and your creative capacities in positive ways. Can gaming do this? If it can, then it would not necessarily be mere entertainment, killing time or distraction.
  • yatagarasu
    123


    Reading books may contribute to re-forming your character, your intelligence, knowledge and understanding, emotional and ethical responses, and your creative capacities in positive ways. Can gaming do this? If it can, then it would not necessarily be mere entertainment, killing time or distraction.Janus

    They most certainly can, as can any medium. It's just that the more popular games are the game described by the opening poster, @gurugeorge. There is an entire section of games that focus on role playing, or just tell stories with few "gameplay" elements. Some are basically interactive movies. The same criticism can be applied to all media to some degree. I do understand the concern though. You should ideally be using books, movies, visual novels, video games, really any form of art as inspiration for your creations or life, not just for pure entertainment.
  • BC
    13.5k
    I have no experience playing video games. I can not judge whether they are a waste of, or a productive use of time. I have heard from others (you, for instance) that they are addictive. They probably are, but many experiences are structured to keep us coming back for more.

    Video games, board games, exciting novels, horror movies, love stories -- all kinds of inexpensive entertainment furnish brief but intense emotional moments that we want more of. It strikes me that there is nothing unique about video games. Further, some people have always spent way too much time reading, and not doing much else. Or watching television for long periods of time.

    Of course people waste time rather than using their time productively. If we lived in a much poorer economy where continual effort was needed to obtain the basic necessities and meager pleasures, we wouldn't be playing video games all day. We wouldn't watch television for 8 hours a day, stay up very late reading sci-fi novels, and so on. We would work all day and go to bed early.

    People with hard-driving ethical systems tend to work more, produce more, give more, serve others more, and in general be "more productive". Of course we should all work harder for the common good and naturally we don't. Nothing new about that.
  • S
    11.7k
    Reading books may contribute to re-forming your character, your intelligence, knowledge and understanding, emotional and ethical responses, and your creative capacities in positive ways. Can gaming do this? If it can, then it would not necessarily be mere entertainment, killing time or distraction.Janus

    Yes, it can, and in some ways that books and films cannot. For example, you can be faced with ethical dilemmas where you must make a difficult choice in order to progress, or you must solve a difficult puzzle in order to progress. Video games are capable of being meaningful, emotional, and profound. And don't underestimate what I'm talking about here. Some of these ethical dilemmas can be just as complicated as what can be thought up in philosophy or written in a book, and some of these puzzles can be extraordinarily complex, and might take a very long time to figure out. Videogames are more closely comparable to films, which are in turn more closely comparable to books. Each are a form of artistic medium. But videogames are the most interactive, which sets them apart, and gives them an advantage in some ways. For example, I could never get anywhere near the same level of terror and panic that I've experienced in a videogame like Outlast from a film, and certainly not from a book.

    We agreeJanus

    Oh. Now I feel like I'm preaching to the choir. Playing devil's advocate? In any case, this reply is here for the sake of others who might disagree - mistakenly, of course.
  • S
    11.7k
    It strikes me that there is nothing unique about video games.Bitter Crank

    That's not true, and I think that only the most simplistic and disengaged of analyses could make it seem so. That you, by your own admission, have no experience playing videogames, shows. But then, I can't help but think that even if I was in that position of having no experience of playing videogames, I still wouldn't deny that they are in some ways unique.
  • gurugeorge
    514
    Can gaming do this?Janus

    There are some peak moments in some of the story-driven games. Gaming has two aspects, the gamey aspect (competitive, learning a skill, a system, etc.) and the immersive aspect (the sense of being another character in another world). Most videogames are a blend of these two aspects, albeit weighted more towards one aspect or the other, and that's what makes them unique, their own thing. They're like miniature real worlds that you inhabit, that have simplified rules that allow you to win more than you would in real life (that's what makes them addictive, you get the pleasure jag of overcoming obstacles that are just within your reach to overcome, if you put in a little bit of effort).

    It's the videogames that are weighted more towards story and immersion that offer something similar to novels and movies, and there have been a few games (by companies like BioWare, Bethesda, the now-defunct Looking Glass, and several other notable companies) that have had some storylines/quests that have provided thoughtful ethical problems, and rewarded the player with a real emotional payoff, made all the more present and real by virtue of the interactivity and immersion factor. I'm not ashamed to say that there have been a few occasions where I've made a decision that's led to an NPC (non-player character) having an emotional change of heart or epiphany, and it's made me cry.

    I wouldn't want to say that happens all the time, but it does happen, and players love and praise companies like BioWare who provide those "magical moments."
  • gurugeorge
    514
    Of course we should all work harder for the common good and naturally we don't.Bitter Crank

    As I say, I think there's a balance to be struck - "all work and no play ..." etc. Playing, relaxation, pastimes definitely have a place in the economy of a life, just as consumption more generally. But one has to output too, for maximum fulfillment, and that's the danger of all addictions (and probably most drug addictions too), they can lead to a life filled with passive consumption, which is ultimately unsatisfying. It's the miniature version, in the individual, of the larger, public "freedom requires eternal vigilance."
  • BC
    13.5k
    A balance to be sure of productivity, consumption, and amusements, if at all possible.

    We have the ability to turn an ordinary activity into a folly, from betting on a horse to bankrupting ourselves at gambling; from smoking a joint or snorting a bit of dope to destroying our health with drug addiction and so on. Actually, most of us steer well clear of folly in most areas. When we don't steer clear our behavior becomes quite problematic. Video games played obsessively or chatrooms, texting, and Facebook attended with an OCD intensity are problems of the persons more than problems of the gadgets, though the gadgets aid and abet the obsessive.

    Whether someone dabbles with stuff that is a waste of time, or submerges themselves in it with abandon depends on their personality. Some people are (practically) fated to become addicted. It isn't their fault to be so fated; it may be there fault, to some degree, to not guard against addiction once they know they are liable to be hooked.
  • gurugeorge
    514
    problems of the persons more than problems of the gadgets, though the gadgets aid and abet the obsessive.Bitter Crank

    New technology always has benefits and costs (everything necessarily has benefits and costs), but often we lose sight of that in the hype and excitement around new toys. The costs usually involve some lack of mesh between some people's proclivities and propensities, and the new thing - and the disjoint, the gear-grinding, would never have had an opportunity to manifest until the thing was invented (although it might have shown up in something analogous or otherwise partly related - e.g. he was formerly a gambler who used to waste time at the local bookies, now he's addicted to opening "lockboxes" in videogames.).

    it may be there fault, to some degree, to not guard against addiction once they know they are liable to be hookedBitter Crank

    Yeah that's true. The way I look at it is that yes, we are given (and therefore cannot be morally faulted for) this vast ocean liner of an ongoing bundle of habits, some from our genes, some from early training and environmental affordances. In that context, our rational mind, our awake, rational self is like a tugboat - small in relation to that bulk, but quite powerful despite its smallness, and capable of shifting the mass in a new direction if persistently applied (more or less in a CBT/Stoic manner). And I think we properly criticize each other morally when we "let ourselves slide" and fail to utilize the power of our little tugboat to get us out of our messes.
  • Janus
    16.2k
    Oh. Now I feel like I'm preaching to the choir. Playing devil's advocate? In any case, this reply is here for the sake of others who might disagree - mistakenly, of course.Sapientia

    I should have been more specific; I was agreeing to this:

    You should ideally be using books, movies, visual novels, video games, really any form of art as inspiration for your creations or life, not just for pure entertainment.yatagarasu

    I don't have any personal experience with video games such as to be able to agree with the rest of what was written, although it seems plausible to me that they could well be as you, yatagarasu, and guru have been saying.
  • Janus
    16.2k


    What you say here seems indeed plausible; I find no reason to doubt that video games are as worthy as other forms of entertainment, and that the medium can transcend mere entertainment just as the other mediums can.
  • VagabondSpectre
    1.9k
    Some video games blur the line between consumption and creation. As interactive art forms they can be of immensely high quality and serve many functions (learning, creativity, escapism, etc...) aside from being inherently entertaining.

    Some video games (sandboxes usually) allow you to create in-game content that was never intended or anticipated by the game designers. In-game discovery and evolution can then go on to influence the creation of new games (and industries surrounding games and the way games develop) in a cycle that is as self-serving as any modern human endeavor.

    A game called "DayZ" was released as a player created "mod" (modification) for a different game called Arma II (a modern warfare simulator). It was an open world zombie survival concept with no rules, and it went on to inspire a slew of subsequent copy-cats. One of the most popular things to do in such games was to play "battle royales" (not unlike the hunger games franchise), which went on to inspire a host of subsequent niche games (notably, player unknown's battle grounds and Fortnite, the latter being the most popular game in the world right now, and alone responsible for hundreds of millions of dollars of investment into a burgeoning industry known as "e-sports").

    Even if the creative products of various games are self-contained (the evolution of chess strategy as an example), it still adds to their intrinsic value as entertainment.

    Too much video games is bad though (too much of anything is bad). A Korean man once died playing a game called Starcraft because he literally kept playing for too long and with too few breaks. Starcraft in South Korea is (was) almost like a national sport, having had televised broadcasts of tournaments for many years, and the best players are considered famous just like any other celebrity (fawning fans and all). Starcraft "streamers" in korea and in the west pioneered the initial growth of e-sports before the market diverged to include many games. In a society where playing video games can actually lead to wealth and fame (the income of the popular video-game streamers is downright absurd) how much video games is too much video games entails an altered equation.

    I wonder what kind of video game might Charles Orwell or H.P Lovecraft have designed? (Horrors I reckon). What about Van Gogh? Da Vinci? Tolkien?

    In their respective mediums and styles, did they engage too much?
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.